Lord Bach: My department has not commissioned research specifically into the financial viability of farming in the United Kingdom over the next five years. However, it prepares projections of total income from farming in the United Kingdom and these look five years ahead. The latest projections, including forecasts of TIFF up to and including 2010, will be published in Agriculture in the United Kingdom, 2005 at the end of March. The latest published set of projections appear in Chart 2.2 of Chapter 2 of Agriculture in the United Kingdom, 2004, with supporting text at paragraphs 2 and 3 of the same chapter. A link is inserted below.
	The Government commission annual surveys into farm incomes, through the Farm Business Surveys in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The data from these surveys can be used as a basis for projecting incomes into the future and work of this nature is sometimes undertaken, although this is usually done in-house rather than as commissioned research.
	www.statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/publications/auk/2004/chapter2.pdf.

The Earl of Selborne: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the research required to determine how the European Union Water Framework Directive could most effectively be implemented would still be feasible if the Natural Environment Research Council's proposals to reduce staff members at the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology are implemented.

Lord Bach: The Natural Environment Research Council is currently consulting widely with stakeholders on proposals on how best the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology can contribute on a sustainable basis to maintaining the quality of environmental science in the UK. I am sure that the NERC will consider all evidence and views on the potential impact of the proposals including any impact on the implementation of the Water Framework Directive. CEH will continue to deliver its contractual agreements to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and other government departments and agencies.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) is wholly owned by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC): NERC's science budget allocation has doubled since 1997 to £334 million for this year, demonstrating our commitment to maintaining the quality of environmental research in the UK. NERC is currently consulting widely with stakeholders on proposals on how best CEH can contribute on a sustainable basis to this.
	If, following consultation, NERC decides to proceed with the restructuring, the costs would be met from NERC's science budget allocation, and the department has indicated that it would be willing to increase NERC's allocation by up to £14.2 million over 2006–08 so as to support the delivery of its core programmes in these circumstances. I have asked the chief executive of NERC to write to the noble Earl regarding the breakdown.

Courts

Lord Bach: The Government fully support the Great Ape Survival Project Partnership (GRASP); we have done since it was first established in 2002. Nearly £600,000 has been contributed over this period, and we remain the project's single largest government donor. This funding includes the £50,000 that we made available to support the intergovernmental meeting in Kinshasa that concluded the Kinshasa declaration.
	At the Kinshasa meeting, the UK was elected to represent donor states on GRASP's executive committee, which shapes the project's direction and helps to determine its priorities. We have also promoted the project with other potential donor countries.
	To support GRASP's activities, the Government have helped to promote good practice in ape sanctuaries across Africa, including funding a workshop of the Pan-African Sanctuaries Alliance. We have provided more direct support for great ape conservation efforts through our Flagship Species Fund and Darwin Initiative programmes. And we have supported the Great Ape Film Initiative, which aims to spread constructive-conservation messages across the great apes' range in Africa and south-east Asia on television and on video/DVD.

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord McKenzie of Luton on 25 January (WA 169), why they declined to provide information regarding the financial contributions of European Union member states over the period 2007–13 European Union budget when the statement by the Lord President (Baroness Amos) on 19 December (HL Deb, cols. 1569–70) provided information in respect of the contributions of France, Italy, Spain, Romania and Bulgaria.

Lord McKenzie of Luton: As around 75 per cent. of the Own Resources System that finances the EC budget is funded by member states' GNI contributions, most member states make roughly the same contribution to the budget of around 1 per cent. of GNI. The exceptions to this are: Belgium, which pays a disproportionate share of Traditional Own Resources (customs duties, agricultural duties and sugar levies which account for around 10 per cent. of the Own Resources System) because of the port of Antwerp; and Austria, the Netherlands, Sweden, Germany and the UK which benefit from corrections that lower their contributions to the EC budget.
	A member state's total receipts largely depend on its receipts from the structural and cohesion funds and the common agricultural policy, which together account for around 75 per cent. of the EC budget. Based on the European Commission's forecasts and assumptions, and using the financial perspective table agreed on 17 December 2005, the Treasury estimates that the largest recipients (those that receive significantly more than they contribute) are: Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. Those that receive more than they contribute are: Belgium, Cyprus, Greece, Ireland, Malta, Portugal, Spain and Slovenia. Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden and the UK all receive less than they contribute.

Lord Rooker: Divorce statistics for 2005 have not yet been finalised. The table below gives the number of divorces in Northern Ireland in each year between 1999 and 2004 and the total number of children aged under 16 affected by divorce. Number of divorces in Northern Ireland and number of children aged under 16 affected by divorce by year
	
		
			 Year Number of Divorces Number of Children Aged Under 16 Affected 
			 1999 2,326 2,410 
			 2000 2,350 2,298 
			 2001 2,365 2,392 
			 2002 2,165 2,034 
			 2003 2,319 2,205 
			 2004 2,512 2,228

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Rooker on 11 January (WA 59) concerning the funding of Gaelic Athletic activities, how much small projects funding has been made available in each of the past five years; to whom; for what purpose; and when.

Lord Rooker: The Sports Council for Northern Ireland (SCNI) is responsible for the development of sport in Northern Ireland, including the distribution of funding. Under its exchequer and lottery programmes, SCNI has provided investment in small Gaelic Athletic Association projects. In addition, various government departments have provided small project funding. A list of projects funded over the past five years has been placed in the Library of the House.

Lord Warner: At the end of December 2005, less than 0.01 per cent. of patients were waiting over six months.

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will place in the Library the documents which lead to the selection of the Maze as a proposed site for the national stadium in Northern Ireland as referred to by a Northern Ireland Office Minister in the Belfast Telegraph on 31 January.

Lord Rooker: I can confirm that William Mackessy was appointed to the Northern Ireland Civil Service following an open competition. I refer the noble Lord to the answer given on 21 October 2002 (Columns WA 82–84) in respect of the other matters he has raised.

Lord Rooker: The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure did not provide transitional funding to the 3 festivals in question in 2003.
	In 2004 the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure's element of transitional funding for festivals was administered by the Northern Ireland Events Company.
	In 2005 the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure administered the transitional funding. The department did not request changes to the business information received from festivals applying for transitional funding. Rather, additional information was sought where there were gaps or for clarity.
	The business plans for the Ulster Scots Agency, which are public documents, required various changes, alterations and typographical corrections before approval. Information on the detail and number of changes made is not held in the form requested and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	Details of amounts requested and amounts provided are given in the tables below
	
		2003–04 Transitional Funding
		
			 Group Amount of government funding requested* Amount of DCAL funding received Amount of DSD funding received Percentage received 
			 Féile an Phobail £148,000 NIL £105,160.15 71.05 
			 Ardoyne Fleadh £59,080 NIL £57,394.65 97.15 
			 Gtr New Lodge £29,160 NIL £29,160.00 100 
		
	
	
		2003–04
		
			 Group Amount Requested Amount Allocated Percentage Received 
			 Ulster Scots Agency Budget £1.57 million £1.54 million 98 
		
	
	
		2004–05 Transitional Funding
		
			 Group Amount of Government funding Requested* Amount of DCAL funding Received Amount of DSD funding received Percentage Received 
			 Féile an Phobai1 £135,000 £20,000 £102,720.95 90.9 
			 Ardoyne Fleadh £66,980 £10,000 £60,080.00 104.62 ** 
			 Greater New Lodge £59,100 £10,000 £29,160.00 66.26 
		
	
	* This amount is the total amount of government funding requested and relates to both the Department for Social Development and the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure.
	** The departments are pursuing clawback of this over-provision.
	
		2004–05
		
			 Group Amount Requested Amount Allocated Percentage Received 
			 Ulster Scots Agency Budget £2.98 million £1.784 million* 60 
		
	
	* Includes in-year bid for £80,000 in 2004.
	
		2005–06 Transitional Funding
		
			 Group Amount of Government funding Requested* Amount of DCAL funding received Amount of DSD funding received Percentage Received to date 
			 Féile an Phobail £180,000 Nil £106,232.48 59.02 
			 Ardoyne Fleadh £72,500 £7,500 £58,905.00 91.59 
			(to date) 
			 Greater New Lodge £39,160 £7,500 £29,160.00 93.61 
		
	
	* This amount is the total amount of government funding requested and relates to both the Department for Social Development and the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure.
	
		2005–06
		
			 Group Amount Requested Amount Allocated Percentage Received 
			 Ulster Scots Agency Budget £2.03 million £1.809 million** 89 
		
	
	** Includes in-year bid for £40,000 in 2005.

Lord Rooker: I am advised that the role of a sector and response officer was independently reviewed on behalf of PSNI by Sheffield Hallam University in 2003. The review confirmed the validity of the assessment and increased the standard marginally.
	In 2004 the test was removed from the applicant process and is now applied as a mandatory requirement at the of the student officer course and at the end of the probationer period.

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the cost of all current Government-funded local authority and Highway Agency road schemes when first submitted for Targeted Programme Improvement approval; what are the latest cost estimates; and what are the percentage changes.

Lord Davies of Oldham: I have placed three tables setting out the information requested for the targeted programme of improvements (TPI) and local transport major road schemes in the House Library.
	Table 1 provides a list of TPI schemes that entered the programme before April 2003. This shows the latest agreed scheme budget against the scheme cost submitted for TPI entry approval. The scheme costs at programme entry were based on net scheme costs only and excluded VAT, projected inflation and optimism bias. The latest agreed budget scheme costs include allowance for identified risks, inflation up to scheme completion, non-recoverable VAT and optimism bias, in line with revised Treasury guidance issued in April 2003. This means that scheme costs pre-April 2003 cannot be directly compared with the latest agreed budget costs post-April 2003, as they are calculated on a different basis.
	For the schemes in table 1, about £0.6 billion (39 per cent) of the £1.54 billion variance against the cost reported at TPI entry is attributable to the addition of VAT, projected inflation at 2.5 per cent. and optimism bias. The remainder can be attributed to underestimates in the scope of schemes and the impact of inflation. Scheme budgets have assumed that construction inflation would run at 2.5 per cent. per annum. The latest indications suggest that a higher allowance may be more appropriate.
	Table 2 provides a list of TPI schemes that entered the programme since April 2003. Both the costs of the schemes at TPI entry and the latest agreed budget costs are now reported on the basis of projected outturn scheme and include an allowance for risk, inflation, non-recoverable VAT and optimism bias. The two sets of figures are therefore directly comparable.
	Table 3 provides a list of local authority schemes where cost estimation is the responsibility of the promoting authority. The department requires scheme costings to be based on the authority's best estimate of outturn scheme cost including allowance for cost inflation up to scheme completion and provision for risk. Cost increases are subject to close scrutiny.
	Both Highways Agency and local authority schemes with cost increases are subject to reappraisal and value for money assessment in line with Department for Transport guidance.
	
		Table 1—Highways Agency Targeted Programme of Improvement schemes—Prior to April 2003
		
			 Scheme TPI Entry cost(£ million) Latest agreed budget cost(£ million) Percentage Increase (see footnote) 
			 A1(M) Ferrybridge - Hook Moor (DBFO) 160 160 0 
			 A2 Bean -Cobham Phase 2 35 101 189 
			 A2/A282 Dartford Improvement 38 72 89 
			 A14 Rookery Crossroads GSJ 5 10 100 
			 A249 Iwade-Queenborough Improvement (DBFO) 79 81 3 
			 A303 Stonehenge 125 Under review. Latest estimate is 470 276 
			 A421 Great Barford Bypass 25 58 132 
			 A500 City Road & Stoke 24 55 129 
			 M25 J12-15 Widening 94 120 28 
			 M60 J5-8 Widening 82 116 41 
			 A11 Attleborough Bypass 14 29 107 
			 A11 Fiveways - Thetford Improvement 30 60 100 
			 A47 Thorney Bypass 9 27 200 
			 M6 Carlisle to Guardsmill Extension 46 175 280 
			 A63 Melton Grade Separated Junction 11 22 100 
			 A14 Haughley New St – Stowmarket Improvement 10 32 220 
			 A3 Hindhead Improvement 107 239 123 
			 A38 Dobwalls Bypass 17 36 112 
			 A595 Parton - Lillyhall Improvement 18 30 66 
			 A1 Peterborough - Blyth Grade Separated Junctions 31 83 168 
			 M62 Junction 6 Improvement 24 38 58 
			 A46 Newark - Widmerpool Improvement 82 220 168 
			 A30 Bodmin Indian Queens 49 93 90 
			 A483 Pant- Llanymynech Bypass 17 40 135 
			 A5117/A550 Deeside Park Junctions Improvement 22 43 95 
			 A419 Blunsdon Bypass 29 65 124 
			 A66 Temple Sowerby & Improvement at Winderwath 19 39 105 
			 A1 Dishforth to Barton 225 325 44 
			 Al Bramham - Wetherby (Including Wetherby Bypass) 38 51 34 
			 A64 Rillington Bypass 8 12 50 
			 M40/A404 Handy Cross Junction Improvement 10 14 40 
			 A47 Blofield to North Burlingham Dualling 10 15 50 
			 A66 Greta Bridge to Stephen Bank Improvement 6 9 50 
			 A66 Carkin Moor to Scotch Corner Improvement 7 11 57 
			 A428 Caxton Common to Hardwick Improvement 22 55 150 
			 A30/A382 Merrymeet Junction 7 12 71 
			 A66 Long Newton Junction 6 8 33 
			 A69 Haydon Bridge Bypass 14 24 71 
			 A419 Commonhead Junction 12 16 33 
			 M5 Junctions 19 - 20 Southbound Climbing Lane 9 12 33 
			 M5 Junctions 19 - 20 Northbound Climbing Lane 6 16 167 
		
	
	
		Table 2—Highways Agency Targeted Programme of Improvement schemes—Prior to April 2003
		
			 Scheme TPI Entry cost(£ million) Latest agreed budget cost(£ million) Percentage Increase (see footnote) 
			 M1 J19 Improvement 100 123 23 
			 A14 Ellington - Fen Ditton Improvement 490 490 0 
			 A57/A628 Mottram - Tintwistle Bypass 90 103 14 
			 A45/A46 Tollbar End Improvement 57 57 0 
			 M1 Junction 6a to 10 Widening 241 289 20 
			 M1 Junction 10 to 13 Widening 382 382 0 
			 A1 Morpeth to Felton Dualling 84 84 0 
			 A1 Adderstone to Belford Dualling 14 14 0 
			 A1/A19/A1068 Seaton Burn Junction 30 29 -3 
			 A19/A184 Testos Junction Improvement 21 21 0 
			 A505 Dunstable Northern Bypass 48 48 0 
			 A421 Bedford to M1 Junction 13 171 171 0 
			 A21 Tonbridge to Pembury 65 65 0 
			 M40 Junction 15 (Longbridge) 57 57 0 
			 A590 High & Low Newton Bypass 22 22 0 
			 M20 Junction 10A 46 46 0 
			 A30 Carland Cross to Chiverton Cross 125 125 0 
			 A30 Temple to Higher Carblake Improvement 41 41 0 
			 A27 Southerham to Beddingham Improvement 19 19 0 
			 M1 J21-30 1,915 1,915 0 
			 M25 J1b-3 Widening 66 66 0 
			 M25 J5-7 Widening 214 214 0 
			 M25 J16-23 496 496 0 
			 M25 J23-27 Widening 419 419 0 
			 M25 J27-30 Widening 402 402 0 
			 A21 Kippings Cross to Lamberhurst Bypass 68 68 0 
			 A23 Handcross to Warninglid Widening 41 41 0 
			 A453 Widening (Ml J24 to A52 Nottingham) 90 90 0 
			 M25 Junction 28/A12 Brook Street Interchange 8 8 0 
			 M27 J11 to J12 Climbing Lanes 27 27 0 
			 M27 J3 to J4 Widening 52 52 0 
			 M1 J30 to J31 Widening 135 135 0 
			 M1 J31 to J32 Widening 20 20 0 
			 M1 J32 to J34S Widening 139 139 0 
			 M1 J34N to J37 Widening 246 246 0 
			 M1 J37 to J39 Widening 224 224 0 
			 M1 J39 to J42 Widening 202 202 0 
			 M1 J31 to J32 Northbound Collector/Distributor 29 29 0 
			 M62 J25 to J27 Widening 215 215 0 
			 M62 J27 to J28 Widening 83 83 0 
		
	
	Note: The latest cost estimates represent the approved full outturn costs to deliver the schemes and have been built up as follows:
	base estimate of scheme cost, at 2001 prices time, including non-recoverable VAT and an allowance for risk assessment;
	plus allowance for optimism bias which was introduced in April 2003 following the new Treasury Green Book on investment appraisal and is between 5 per cent. and 45 per cent. depending on the quality of the risk assessment;
	plus inflation at 2.5 per cent. per annum to the projected start date. The projected start date, and by implication these costs, are dependent upon completion of statutory procedures and availability of funds.
	
		Table 3—Local Transport Plan Major Road Schemes (over £5 million)
		
			 Scheme (i) gross cost of scheme when first submitted for approval (ii) most recent estimateor final gross cost of the scheme Percentage Increase 
			 A228 Ropers Lane Phase 1 £15.20 million £18.956 million 25 
			 East Kent Access Phase 1 £12.954 million £23.248 million 79 
			 A228 Leybourne & West Mailing Corridor Improvement £27.94 million £28.47 million 1.5 
			 Kiln Lane Link, Epsom £10.60 million £18.684 million 76 
			 A24 Ashington to Southwater £18.95 million £26.220 million 38 
			 A24 Horsham to Capel Improvement £38.56 million £56.720 million 47 
			 A4146 Stoke Hammond/Linslade Western Bypass £44.66 million £52.842 million 18 
			 M4 J11 (Green Park Improvements) and MereoakRoundabout £43.67 million Option 1 £64.64 million orOption 2 £ 69.61 million 48 or 59 
			 Sittingbourne Northern Relief Road £43.5 million £43.5 million 0 
			 Bexhill Hastings Link Road £47.12 million £48.51 million 3 
			 Cradley Heath Bypass £6.335 million £10.761 million 70 
			 Brierley Hill Access Network £24.310 million £35.000 million 46 
			 A38 Northfield Regeneration Bypass £12.000 million £19.380 million 61 
			 Owen Street Relief Road £8.810 million £17.150 million 95 
			 Selly Oak Relief Road £42.500 million £52.250 million 23 
			 Barford Bypass £6.910 million £10.380 million 50 
			 Rugby Western Bypass £20.280 million £26.818 million 32 
			 Hodnet Bypass £12.515 million £14.902 million 19 
			 Hanley Bentilee Link £15.415 million £21.562 million 40 
			 Tunstall Northern Bypass £6.730 million £7.004 million 4 
			 Leeds Inner Ring Road Stage 7 £35.576 million £50.538 million 42 
			 Rugeley Eastern Bypass £17.454 million £22.844 million 31 
			 East Leeds Link Road £19.380 million £31.881 million 65 
			 Sheffield Inner Relief Road Stages II & III £30.000 million £62.571 million 108 
			 Glasshoughton Coalfields Link Road £6.815 million £11.695 million 72 
			 A63 West Bawtry Road Improvements £5.028 million £5.028 million  
			 Hemsworth to A1 Link Road £11.261 million £22.776 million 102 
			 A628 Cudworth & West Green Bypass £17.198 million £17.198 million 0 
			 A57(T) M1 Junction 31 to Todwick Crossroads £6.264 million £11.900 million 90 
			 A165 Reighton Bypass £6.550 million £6.564 million 0.2 
			 A39 Camelford Bypass £6.8 million £14.4 million ill 
			 A391 St Austell to Bodmin £30.35 million £57 million 88 
			 Barnstaple Western Bypass £32.5 million £43.078 million 33 
			 A354 Weymouth Relief Road £54.567 million £54.567 million  
			 Poole Bridge Regeneration Initiative £14:414 million £46.880 million 225 
			 Brunel Link and Harnham Relief Road £13.0 million £21.803 million 68 
			 A57 Cadishead Way (Brinell Drive – City Boundary) £19.905 million £19.405 million -0.2 
			 The Glossup Spur, Tameside £7.18 million £8.081 million 13 
			 Ashton Northern Bypass Stage 2, Tameside £7.74 million £8.29 million 0.7 
			 Wigan Inner Relief Route £19.5 million £19.5 million 0 
			 A34 Alderley Edge Bypass, Cheshire £37.9 million £40 million 0.5 
			 Carlisle Northern Development Route £24.31 million(traditional funding) £78.812 million(PFI Credits) N/A – Differentfunding mechanism 
			 A58 Blackbrook Diversion, St Helens £7.899 million £8.45 million 0.7 
			 Hall Lane Area Improvements, Liverpool £9.0 million £12.2 million 35 
			 Edge Lane West, Liverpool £15.85 million £15.85 million 0 
			 Bedford Western Bypass £20 million £24.812 million 24 
			 Ridgmont Bypass/ Woburn Link £7.745 million £16.116 million 108 
			 A505 Baldock Bypass £33.821 million £47.408 million 40 
			 Stowmarket Relief Road £13.2 million £17.695 million 34 
			 South Lowestoft Relief Road & Associated Measures £25.4 million £30.621 million 21 
			 A127/A1159 Priory Crescent, Southend on Sea £14.5 million(this includes 3elements of scheme,1 of which is a road) £27.533 million(this includes 3elements of scheme,1 of which is a road) Latest budget figureincludes 3 elements ofscheme not just roadelement 
			 A1198 Papworth Everard Bypass £5.4 million £8.740 million 62 
			 Sunderland Southern Radial Route £17.026 million £28.720 million 69 
			 Darlington Eastern Transport Corridor £5.700 million £12.100 million 112 
			 A688 Wheatley Hill - Bowburn Link, Durham £6.624 million £9.180 million 36 
			 Pegswood Bypass, Northumberland £8.140 million £9.375 million 15 
			 North Middlesbrough Accessibility Improvements £12.220 million £12.220 million  
			 Sunderland Central Route £16.540 million £16.540 million 0 
			 A1056 Northern Gateway, North Tyneside £9.916 million £14.327 million 44 
			 A6096 Ilkeston-Awsworth Link, Derbyshire £8.606 million £12.270 million 43 
			 Markham Employment Growth Zone, Derbyshire £21.5 million £23.5 million 9 
			 A158/C541 Lincolnshire Coastal Access Improvement (including Phase 1 – Partney Bypass) £15.515 million(for all 3 phases) Phase 1 -£7.791 millionPhase 2 - £14.15 millionPhase 3 - £9.38 millionTotal (£31.321 million) 101 (for all 3 phasesof scheme) 
			 A1073 Spalding to Eye Improvement, Lincolnshire £24.835 million £70.4 million 183 
			 A43 Corby Link Road £12.717 million £15.2 million 19 
			 A509 Isham Bypass, Northamptonshire £13.9 million £14.6 million 5 
			 A612 Gedling Integrated Transport Scheme,Nottinghamshire £7.067 million £11.664 million 65 
			 Oakham Bypass £7.650 million £11.666 million 52 
		
	
	Note:
	(1) Schemes not yet approved are subject to the completion of the relevant statutory processes and will require final approval by the department.
	(2) Schemes that have been funded through the local transport plan programme and have been completed between 1999–2005 are not included in the list.
	(3) Provisionally approved schemes with costs in excess of the original approval are subject to detailed scrutiny and appraisal processes before being considered for full approval.

Lord Bach: The remuneration of the chief executive of the Rural Payments Agency (RPA) is agreed between the chief executive and the Secretary of State within a framework set by the Cabinet Office.
	The chief executive is eligible for an annual bonus of up to 18.5 per cent. of salary. The precise value of the bonus is determined by Defra's permanent secretary on behalf of the Secretary of State, based on performance against the agency's published key performance targets. This is assessed through an independent validation completed at the end of the financial year.
	The RPA chief executive's annual salary falls within the Senior Civil Service pay band 2 range of £75,607 to £159,659.

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations they have made to the government of Sudan about bringing to justice those responsible for violence in Darfur.

Lord Triesman: United Nations Security Council Resolution 1556 of 30 July 2004 demanded that the Government of Sudan disarm the Janjaweed militias and requested the Secretary-General to report in 30 days, and monthly thereafter, to the council on the progress or lack thereof. In his report on Darfur of 23 December 2005, the UN Secretary-General noted that,
	"the vast majority of armed militias have not been disarmed".
	When my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary and I met the Sudanese Foreign Minister on 3 February 2006, we pressed him on the need for the Government of Sudan to comply fully with all its obligations under UN Security Council resolutions, including disarming the Janjaweed. We will continue to do so.